turtledovefandomcom-20200216-history
Forum:Character Template Revision
Now that we have stackable templates, I am considering a possible overhaul of our character templates, specifically as applies to the historical figures (although the fictional ones would trail). This idea came to me after I had to edit the current historical figure template to allow adding "Shtetl Days" into to the Hitler article. It's really a bit of a pain. We could create templates that are story specific, rather than the "one-size fits all" approach that the current template requires, with color coding, POD info, and other things to a)increase user friendliness and; b) hopefully stop hit and runners. Please take a look at the sandbox for a demonstration. I created new 191 template for the demonstration. The biggest down side in my mind is that there's going to be a ton of work to modify the articles. Also, we'll still need a generic template for stand-alone short stories, since we don't handle those in the same way as we do with novels and series. That's not really a down-side, I suppose. TR 15:52, May 12, 2011 (UTC) :I checked the sandbox but, maybe I'm misreading you, but I'm having a hard time visualizing its implications. It's going to be a header under which the information from Stonewall Jackson's 191 info will fall? Or a separate box altogether? Turtle Fan 18:58, May 12, 2011 (UTC) ::It will be a header, but it will use a separate box. I'll do up Stonewall's as an example. TR 19:04, May 12, 2011 (UTC) :::That looks good. All I can think to say against it is a point that's hardly worth making, that it's very often going to outrun the length of article text significantly. It does that already but this will make it even more so. Turtle Fan 19:45, May 12, 2011 (UTC) ::::Ok, I'm still not 100% certain this should be done (mainly because it's a lot of work), but I'm seeing more upsides than downsides at this point. What sorts of information, aside from the basics, should go into the more story specific templates if we go down this route? TR 15:29, May 13, 2011 (UTC) :::::Re workload: There's no law saying it has to be done right away. We can take it slowly, make the change any time we need to edit an article for another reason and knock off a few here, a few there. Look how long it took us to set up the templates, or to migrate the Historical Figures. :::::Re added info: I think what we have now is likely to suffice. We've got role in the story and, for multi-story works, appearances. What more would we need? Turtle Fan 19:36, May 13, 2011 (UTC) Just a heads-up: I've edited the Historical Figures template so we get a little heading for "Turtledove Works". That will be showing up in all the historical figure pages. I am going to go ahead and just start changing the historicals unless someone strenuously objects. Also, I will go ahead and create a fictional template for TWPE, since that's the big ongoing work at the moment, but I'm not going to rush off and do fictional characters at this moment. If anyone wants to add a new fictional character in an old work, let me know, and I'll build a new template. ML4E, I know you've been working on BotS, so I'll create a Videssos Fictional Character Infobox. TR 15:57, May 20, 2011 (UTC) :Thank-you kindly. ML4E 22:11, May 24, 2011 (UTC) ML4E has proposed a formating possibility in the John Adams article. I think is much to commend it. It accomplishes my primary goal of reader-friendliness, and addresses the issue TF brought up of infoboxes being longer than articles. The only "negative" I see is that it might make the article seem "cramped", but I don't think it does. TR 17:18, May 21, 2011 (UTC) Donut. TR 16:27, May 23, 2011 (UTC) :It may be only my browser, but the way the article was before had all three boxes side by side and not stacked. Because the historical character box is so long, here would have been room for the two story boxes to be one above the other beside it, but they were in a row, squeezing the first part of the article. If it were a character in a half dozen stories, I don't know what would have happened and am afraid to try. ML4E 22:11, May 24, 2011 (UTC) Well, hell. The Stack Template's stopped working. Let me see what I can do. TR 20:28, May 25, 2011 (UTC) Clearright, etc. Ok, for reasons I don't begin to understand, the Stack template won't work. However the Clearright Template works. See the Wright Brothers. It appears to be a simpler template, so maybe it's for the best. TR 21:01, May 25, 2011 (UTC) Also, I went ahead and restored the suggested alternative format at the John Adams page. Even with stackability up and running again, there are merits to ML4E's proposal. TR 22:31, May 25, 2011 (UTC)